Arizona ICE Act Advances, Bringing Local Police Into Immigration Debate

Dive Right Into

Key Takeaways

SB 1164 mandates formal agreements with federal agencies and local law enforcement’s compliance with ICE detainer requests under the 287(g) program.
It lacks state funding for costs like officer training, posing resource challenges for participating local authorities.
Governor Katie Hobbs opposes SB 1164, increasing the likelihood of a veto despite its advancement by the Republican-majority legislature.

The Arizona Senate Committee on Military Affairs and Border Security has made a substantial move in addressing immigration enforcement by advancing Senate Bill 1164 (SB 1164), also called the “Arizona ICE Act.” This proposed legislation, backed by Republican lawmakers and spearheaded by Senate President Warren Petersen, aims to deepen cooperation between local law enforcement agencies and federal immigration authorities. Under SB 1164, state and local enforcement entities would be required to engage in formal agreements with federal agencies for immigration enforcement. This has sparked both controversy and significant public attention across the state.

What SB 1164 Entails

Arizona ICE Act Advances, Bringing Local Police Into Immigration Debate

At the heart of SB 1164 is the Federal 287(g) program, an initiative that trains state and local officers to assist with federal immigration enforcement. This program gives specific officers the ability to perform certain tasks, like interviewing individuals to determine their immigration status, accessing Department of Homeland Security (DHS) databases, and issuing detainers that hold individuals until Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) can take custody of them. These steps ultimately aim to identify individuals who are in the U.S. unlawfully and increase deportations. SB 1164 would mandate all county sheriffs and Arizona’s Department of Corrections to sign onto partnerships under this program, effectively obligating state and local officers to contribute to immigration enforcement.

One prominent feature of the bill includes a requirement for state and local law enforcement to comply with ICE detainer requests. These requests are used to temporarily hold individuals identified as undocumented by federal authorities. However, the absence of state funding in SB 1164 to address the costs involved, such as officer training and other responsibilities, has been noted by even the bill’s sponsor, Senator Petersen. Implementing this legislation will, without doubt, pose financial challenges for local authorities who may lack resources for additional training or manpower.

Justification for the Bill

Senator Petersen and other supporters of the Arizona ICE Act argue that stricter immigration policies are essential to protect citizens and lessen the financial strain caused by unauthorized migration. They point to data provided by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which estimates that undocumented immigration costs Arizona taxpayers approximately $3.19 billion annually. The breakdown of this figure includes $1.36 billion spent on education and $631 million allocated for law enforcement and incarceration. Other costs related to healthcare, public assistance, and general government services also add to this total.

For proponents, this financial argument underscores the importance of implementing stricter policies like SB 1164. Senator Petersen has described it as “commonsense legislation” to ensure local and federal agencies work together effectively. The bill’s advancement is significant not only for Arizona residents but also in the broader national debate on immigration enforcement.

Concerns and Criticism

The Arizona ICE Act has drawn sharp criticism from Democratic lawmakers, civil rights advocates, and immigrant rights groups. Opponents argue that requiring police to actively engage in immigration enforcement could lead to problems like racial profiling or strained relationships between law enforcement and immigrant communities. Senator Catherine Miranda highlighted concerns about the risks of racial profiling, while Representative Cesar Aguilar voiced fears that mixed-status families could face disruption due to the bill’s strict detention requirements. Aguilar noted that parents who commit minor offenses, like traffic violations, could potentially face deportation, leading to the breaking up of families.

Governor Katie Hobbs has also emerged as a vocal critic of SB 1164. She has rejected the one-size-fits-all approach that the Arizona ICE Act demands, arguing that local agencies, already stretched thin in resources, do not need additional mandates. Hobbs believes that the existing coordination between federal and local agencies is sufficient for addressing immigration issues in Arizona. She remarked, “I don’t think it’s right to give a one-size-fits-all mandate to local agencies that are already struggling with resources and who already do cooperate with different law enforcement agencies.”

Several immigrant rights groups have also raised significant alarm about this legislation. Organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Arizona are particularly concerned about its impact on community trust. ACLU Arizona Director Victoria Lopez referred to SB 1164 as “overreach by state lawmakers in order to curry political favor from the federal administration and advance an agenda that is contrary to the constitution.” Further signaling their opposition, demonstrators gathered at the state Capitol on February 18, 2025, with plans to continue weekly protests against the bill.

Alternative Proposals and Ongoing Debate

In response to the Arizona ICE Act, Democratic lawmakers have put forth their own legislative proposal, the “Immigrant Trust Act.” This proposed legislation works in the opposite direction of SB 1164 by seeking to limit law enforcement’s involvement in immigration enforcement. The Immigrant Trust Act explicitly aims to prevent police from stopping, questioning, or detaining individuals solely based on their immigration status. Furthermore, it seeks to prevent police officers from holding individuals past the required time to address a violation, even if federal officials request additional time to assume custody.

This contrasting approach highlights the vast differences in how Republican and Democratic lawmakers view Arizona’s role in immigration enforcement. Democrats argue for a more community-oriented approach, insisting that overly strict policies will erode trust between immigrant communities and local authorities.

Broader Political Context and Implications

The Arizona ICE Act’s journey takes place in a politically charged climate. Arizona voters backed President Trump in November 2024, further solidifying the state’s shift toward stricter immigration measures. Around the same time, voters approved Proposition 314, making it a state crime for non-citizens to enter Arizona outside official entry points. Proposition 314 also empowers state and local police to arrest those crossing the border illegally and grants state judges the authority to issue deportation orders.

The passage of Proposition 314 indicates a growing support among many Arizona residents for tougher immigration controls. However, Democratic lawmakers like Senator Analise Ortiz argue that these election outcomes do not automatically translate into broad support for SB 1164. Ortiz emphasized the moral responsibility of protecting families, particularly mixed-status families living in fear of separation. She noted that concerns about deportation deter many immigrants from reporting crimes or accessing essential public services.

Potential Challenges Ahead

Although SB 1164 has cleared its first legislative hurdle, its future is far from certain. The bill still faces staunch opposition from immigrant advocates, Democratic lawmakers, and Governor Katie Hobbs. Governor Hobbs’ opposition, in particular, raises the likelihood of a potential veto, even if the Republican-majority legislature passes the Arizona ICE Act. The weekly public protests also suggest that activists will continue ensuring their voices remain part of the conversation.

Critics of SB 1164 believe passing such a law could fundamentally alter relationships between immigrant communities and law enforcement agencies. Fear of deportation may lead undocumented individuals to avoid reporting crimes, attending court hearings, or cooperating with police investigations. Opponents argue this would result in less-safe neighborhoods, counteracting the supposed intention of the bill.

The Road Ahead for SB 1164

The Arizona ICE Act represents a pivotal moment in the state’s immigration policymaking. By requiring closer collaboration between local agencies and federal immigration authorities, it takes a strong stance on illegal immigration. However, the political and public debate surrounding SB 1164 reveals the complexities of immigration enforcement in Arizona.

Whether the bill moves forward or stalls in the legislative process, its broader implications are undeniable. Should SB 1164 succeed, it could serve as a roadmap for similar legislation in other states. If rejected, it would highlight the hurdles for stricter immigration measures, even in states with Republican-dominated legislatures. As the situation develops, both supporters and opponents of the Arizona ICE Act are watching closely to see how Arizona balances immigration enforcement with community trust.

For official information on the Federal 287(g) program referenced in SB 1164, you can visit the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement page at 287(g) Immigration Enforcement Program.

Learn Today

SB 1164 (Arizona ICE Act) → Proposed Arizona legislation mandating state and local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration authorities under formal agreements.
287(g) Program → A federal initiative allowing state and local officers to assist in immigration enforcement through specialized training and agreements.
ICE Detainer Request → A request from Immigration and Customs Enforcement to local authorities to hold an individual for federal custody over immigration issues.
Mixed-Status Families → Families with members of differing immigration statuses, such as undocumented parents and citizen children, vulnerable to separation policies.
Proposition 314 → Arizona measure criminalizing unauthorized border crossings and granting state police the authority to arrest and judges to issue deportation orders.

This Article in a Nutshell

Arizona’s SB 1164, dubbed the “Arizona ICE Act,” mandates local enforcement to collaborate with federal agencies under the 287(g) program, intensifying immigration control. Supporters cite financial benefits; critics warn of racial profiling and strained community trust. The bill’s journey highlights a deep political divide, framing Arizona as a battleground for immigration policy debates.
— By VisaVerge.com